DC Gun Case

[denton]

SCOTUS has said that "all remaining decisions" will be announced at 10:00 Eastern tomorrow, June 26.

If you go to scotusblog (http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/) you will see the announcement immediately after it happens.

It is widely believed that Scalia will author the opinion. If you like prognostications, here (http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/06/so_lets_say_jus.html) is one that you'll probably enjoy. Scalia is likely to give gun owners a big win, but unlikely to make the ruling binding on the states. That means that someone will have to go after the Chicago ban. Fortunately, that is widely held to be a gimme putt if we win tomorrow as expected.

Note the comments in the Scalia article about the AWB.

[fabsroman]

denton,

When you see the opinion tomorrow, can you send me a link so that I can look at it. I'm pretty sure I could find it myself, but tomorrow is going to be a busy day for me.

As far as the AWB bill is concerned, I cannot believe that Congress is trying to pass that BS after SCOTUS hinted at what its ruling was going to be in this 2nd Amendment case. Honestly, there has been a recent reduction in crime and that is after the AWB was allowed to sunset. As I am frantically trying to buy an AR-15 and an AR-10, I am hoping that Congress doesn't pass the AWB, or if it does, that the President will veto it.

Now, I also read a portion of a book called Freakonomics, which was pretty good. It attributes the reduction in crime to Roe v. Wade wherein abortion was legalized. Supposedly, the children that would have been aborted right after Roe v. Wade would be of the average criminal age today. So, with an increase in abortions, there have been less children that have grown up in a setting that fosters crime.

The more you read, the more it makes you wonder.

[denton]

I'll post the results here soon after they are announced.

The link for scotusblog is http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/ .

You're also probably aware of http://www.volokh.com/ which will also have good insight soon after the results are posted.

The author of the Scalia article believes that a Scalia authored opinion would probably bar the AWB (ban the ban??). And it appears that our man Scalia will be the author of the opinion.

I can't say that I've studied the man in depth, but what I've heard from him I've just loved. He's serious about the Constitution meaning what it says.

[Skinny Shooter]

The radio mentioned today that Scalia will write the opinion but didn't know if he would be writing the majority or minority opinion.
So I'm not holding my breath...

[denton]

Scalia is very likely to write the opinion for the majority, and it is likely to be a hum-dinger.

I'll go out on a limb and predict the following:

1. A clear-cut holding that 2A protects an individual right.

2. A clear-cut holding that laws limiting this right are subject to strict scrutiny. That is, there must be a compelling government interest in limiting the right, and the law must be as narrowly tailored as possible to obtain that interest.

3. No 2A coverage for machine guns. Alan Gura conceded that during orals. It pissed off a lot of machine gun owners, but it was the right thing to do.

4. The result is not yet binding on state laws. That issue was not in play in this case. That will be won in a suit challenging something like Chicago's gun ban, and it will be an easy win. But it is appropriate that that issue is handled separately.

Here is a passage from Scalia's book, if it gives you any comfort:

[T]he Second Amendment [i]s a guarantee that the federal government will not interfere with the individual's right to bear arms for self-defense. ... Dispassionate scholarship suggests quite strongly that the right of the people to keep and bear arms meant just that. ... [T]here is no need to deceive ourselves as to what the original Second Amendment said and meant. Of course, properly understood, it is no limitation upon arms control by the states.

The part about not being a limitation on the states should not worry you. All he's doing is stating that incorporation through the 14th is not automatic.

OTH, we may get more than one surprise tomorrow....

[Rocky Raab]

We won!!! A 5-4 decsion, which was closer than we'd hope or like, but a win is a win.

Full text of the decision here (157-page PDF):

SCOTUSBLOG (http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-290.pdf)

[Dan Morris]

:D :D :D
Dan

[denton]

Here is what I've gathered from reading the opinion, and from various comments on legal boards:

1. This is a very scholarly, strong opinion. Scalia could probably have written something a little weaker, and gotten a 6-3 or 7-2 decision. But he didn't. He gave is the most favorable opinion he could, and still get 5 votes. For the most part, it does not matter how big the victory was, though all 9 justices seemed to agree on the concept of an individual right. SCOTUS will only reverse or overrule itself with great reluctance. The decision is a legal Rock of Gibraltar.

2. Individuals have the right to have operable handguns, shotguns, and rifles in their homes. No federal law can interfere with this right. Laws requiring firearms to be locked or disassembled are out. The question of whether they can carry them about in public places was not addressed.

3. Machine guns do not have protection under the Second Amendment. Gura conceded this point in his orals, and that seriously ticked off a lot of machine gun owners. It was the right thing to do, though. If he had tried to include MGs, we would not have gotten this decision.

4. The decision is not yet binding on states and cities. The case was brought in DC specifically so that the issue of incorporation would not be on the table (made the victory easier to get). That will quickly follow as that NRA files its announced suits against San Francisco, Chicago, and others.

5. We did not get a statement of the level of scrutiny on laws limiting RKBA. That will also follow in subsequent decisions. The Justices left the door open to further cases.

6. Traditional gun laws, such as background checks, are not touched by this decision.

7. It's a huge win. We got pretty much everything that was on the table in this game. We now have that in our pocket and the wind at our back. Still, there is more left to be done than has been done. This could well be re-named the Law Clerks and Attorneys Full Employment Guarantee Decision.

My guesses/estimates:

We will quickly win incorporation against the states and the laws in Chicago will quickly fall.

The AWB would be unconstitutional under this ruling.

We will get a ruling that sets strict scrutiny as the standard for laws limiting RKBA.

Back-door ploys like banning ammunition will fare no better than mandatory locks did.

We will see 20-30 years of decisions re-drawing the boundaries. These will be largely in our favor.

Machine guns may get some 2A protection. The standard for protected arms is basically "those arms commonly owned by law-abiding people". Why are machine guns not commonly owned by law-abiding people? Because the government has made it nearly impossible. No fair!

Mayor Fenty will be tarred and feathered by his fellow gun-grabbers, and ridden out of town on a rail for ever going forward with this. Well, in their hearts at least. The rest of us can just laugh at him, which is what he deserves.

[Aim to maim]

Originally posted by denton

....We will see 20-30 years of decisions re-drawing the boundaries. These will be largely in our favor....

[/B]

That would seem greatly dependent on who is appointed to fill the next few vacancies on the Supreme Court.

[Tater]

What I don't understand is how the gun control nuts continue to say that they want to restrict or ban handguns to keep us safe. Right now pot, heroin, cocaine, etc are all illegal but criminals still get their hands on drugs. If handguns are banned honest citizens (which most folks are) will be left with no way to defend themselves. It's been said many times "When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns". I guess I'll be an outlaw at that point.

[Rocky Raab]

Dear Sarah Brady and ilk,

Go to Heller.

Sincerely,

The good guys

[Dan Morris]

LOL, as to the warnings.."The streets will flow with blood"...
I've talked to customers in 6 states......gutters are NOT red!!!!!
Dan
:cool:

[fabsroman]

Honestly, this will have almost no effect on crime that we can see short term. Long term, it might just help to deter it a lot. People are nuts. Do they think that law abiding citizens are going to go out there and just start shooting one another because of this decision. I think the biggest problem with the antis is that they have no idea what a gun is, or how to use one. It is so foreign to them that they just want to do away with all of them.

I hope the rulings continue to be favorable for us and that the crime rate continues to drop.

[fabsroman]

You have to love Obama. Obviously I'm kidding. The thing that bothers me about a lot of politicians is that they cannot take their own stance on things. In fact, they can barely take any stance whatsoever. I still don't know why the government doesn't ask the people what we want via the poles. Just put stuff on the ballot so we can tell them our position. Then, they can work on getting done what the majority wants (e.g., gun issues, illegal immigration, transportation, taxes).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080627/ap_on_el_pr/candidates_guns

[skeet]

I am so happy that the Supremes found in favor of the 2nd amendment. 5-4?? That is the only part that I find ridiculous. Those 4 must have blinders on. Time to file all those suits ...like in Morton Grove and such places

[denton]

This is tooooo funny!

Remember the part about Chicago being next?

15 minutes after the Heller annoucement, Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois Rifle Club filed suit against Chicago and Mayor Daley both as an official and as a person.

Signature at the bottom? Alan Gura, same guy that led Heller.

That crafty bounder had it planned from the beginning. First, get an individual right. Then go after incorporation and strict scrutiny. Once you have those, go kill the other really bad laws.

Mayor Daley, there is a new sheriff in town...

Inhale deeply. Smell that? It is the savory aroma of state incorporation and strict scrutiny being baked, along with a generous helping of Daley's goose.

Just when I thought it couldn't get any better, and that I could quit messing with this for today!!

Not a party to the suit: The NRA. Gura has his own agenda and vehicle, thanks.

[fabsroman]

I don't think the NRA was a party to the Heller case. The NRA doesn't have standing to be a party. However, I am willing to bet that the NRA is paying Mr. Gura. Now, the NRA could file an Amicus Curiae (i.e., Friend of the Court) brief.

[Jack]

The NRA did file an Amicus brief to the Heller case- as did about 100 other parties.
I don't believe the NRA had any other involvement in Heller, financial or otherwise.

[Steverino]

As a staunch gun owner that peaceably resides in the NW suburbs of Chicago, I am elated at the Supreme Court decision and more importantly, the disertation delivered by Justice Scalia following the narrow ruling on this landmark case.

I am eleated that the court finally recognizes the 2nd Amendment for what it clearly is, an individual right. I suppose that it would have been somewhat impractical of me to consider (yes, I did) that discussion should ensue as to the core of our founding framers reasons for placing this right smack dab behind our guaranteed freedom of speech-mainly to overthrow a tyranical government.

I am utterly and ceasessly amazed at the amount of idiots that I encounter (from Chicago mind you) that are bemoaning this ruling and are spreading the fear-mongering sprew of liberal garbage being repeated over and over to the masses in our local television viewing area as to the expected rampant increases in gun violence to which I state, " because the scumbag criminal gangbangers in Chicago have complied with Emperor Daley's city ban on handgun posession, right?" All this has done is remove the rights of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves.

I used to, at one time, shoot quite a bit with some LEO's before they retired and moved away and they would always comment about a home invaders worst fear being a vigiliant homeowner with a stacked .45 and a 12 ga of 00 buckshot- not the police or a souped-up alarm system.:o

[Rocky Raab]

We missed your too-infrequent posts, Steverino. Good to have you back up.

As Denton reported above, Alan Gura filed the Chicago suit within 15 minutes of the SCOTUS decision. You may not have long to wait to see some results, even before SCOTUS decides to hear it. I'd bet that Daley/Chicago/Illinois think long and hard about defending their ill-conceived, nonsensical laws.

[Steverino]

Thanks Rocky,

I'm embarrassed but have had to resort to "lurker-mode" on HC and some other sites that I enjoy as a result of work demands. I've been in Home Improvment Hell two years this July in a house, against my better judgement, my wife and I purchased to be close to her parents-whom are wonderful folks and need some increasing help as they're getting along in their years. We're having to do more and more for them and my father-in-law is of stubborn German stock that is not at peace unless he is messing around in his shed or tinkering with some sort of project in spite of his failing eyes and poor broken down body. He is a good man that I have vowed will pass on in the sanctity of his comfortable surroundings, any inconsequental hardships on our part, nothwithstanding.

HC is like family and am always amazed at the knowledge, humor, and courtesies extended to all. Unfortunately, I cannot say that about the majority of sites that I have seen over the years.

I will enjoy my cold beer this evening at home, before The Mrs. returns, enjoying the rants and raves of the local news station featuring the Little Napolean of Chicago. I swear he was almost foaming at the mouth in the footage displayed yesterday. Quite enjoyable after the toils of a long, hard week.:D

[Skinny Shooter]

Not to steer the conversation away from the main topic but its a darn shame that tax dollars are once again going to be wasted in defense of bad policy.
Thats criminal and public employees that enact bad law ought to be held directly and financially responsible for any aftermath...
Yeah I know... wishful thinking :rolleyes:

[fabsroman]

Chicago would be better served, along with the anti agenda, to just remove the law from the books so that the issue is no longer an issue. That would leave incorporation for another day. Then again, if all the states did this, would we really need to argue about incorporation? Probably not. If the states just stuck to regulating the truly horrible firearms, which I have no idea what they would be, then we might never reach the incorporation argument in the US Supreme Court.

Steverino,

Good to see you posting. Your father in-law sounds like my dad. My dad is from the northern Italian area, and my mom calls him a German. My dad has to be tinkering with something at all times to be happy. Otherwise, he is just sitting in front of the TV doing nothing.

[Skinny Shooter]

Heller poll on mcnbc

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25391991/

[fabsroman]

Every poll that I have seen about gun control, even those on aol, show that the majority of people are against it. Aol had a survey a couple of years ago about the sunset of the AWB, and the majority, by a decent amount, was for the sunset of that ban.

Based upon that poll of 20,000+ Americans, it appears that the vast majority agree with SCOTUS decision. So, why is it that politicians continue to try to pass gun control laws?

Again, this would be something nice to put on a Presidential election ballet, just so the idiots in Congress can have a grasp of what the MAJORITY of Americans think, and not what their specific special interest groups are concerned about.

[denton]

I think Fabs is absolutely right that if Daley had any sense he would simply fold and take the inssue of incorporation off the table.

Wilmette has already done just that.

There is a pearl in the ruling that is not getting a lot of comment. This alone was worth the effort of bringing the case:

link to article (http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/heller-discussion-board-miller-colt-45s-and-natural-law/)

One aspect of the Heller majority opinion that has not yet attracted the attention of commentariat, but may be greatly important of the long run, is the presence of natural law.

Heller moves self-defense from the shadowy limbo of the Ninth Amendment into the bright uplands of the Second Amendment. It is now beyond dispute, in an American court, that self-defense is an inherent right, and that it is protected by the United States Constitution.

[Hawkeye6]

The bad thing about that poll is that it has one thing wrong. It says the 2nd Ammendment esttablishes the RKBA. That is incorrect. The RKBA, like all other human and civil rights, exist regardless of the Bill of Rights. The Bill merely enmuerates and acknowledges them and clearly states that the Government may not infringe them.

[Lilred]

I think it's as fine as frog's hair that the good fellas won one fer a change. It was close tho :rolleyes:

Ya know, I been watchin Obama on TV and all...seen him yesterday talkin Spanish to the hispanics. I got so riled, I was part near hollerin at the tv lol. The media acts like he's God ascended from heaven. Makes me sick personally. The liberal media. They are just as liberal when it comes to the gun case, esp ABC. Cause they're Disney. A "family" channel. How convienent.

So when some goober just broke out your winder and is fixin to rob you (or worse) at gunpoint, you can just sit there and sing some sappy Disney song.
How many millions does it take to buy off a network in your favor, hmm??? No doubt Obama's got the moolah.

[Rocky Raab]

Actually, it probably wasn't that close at all. What probably really happened was this:

Scalia writes a wussy finding, giving gun owners individual right only, no other bennies. Vote around table 9-0. A win, but...

Scalia rewrites to give individual PLUS another protection: 8-1

Rewrites to give us even more: 7-2.

Again, with even more for the good guys: 6-3

Final rewrite, pushing every possible gun-owner right he can get away with: Final vote 5-4.

We got the mostest we can possibly wring from this crowd of half-liberal idjuts, thanks entirely to the brilliance of Anthony Scalia.

[denton]

Rocky has it right... Scalia pushed it to the limit.

The more I study the opinion, the more I believe that Scalia has brilliantly anticipated the next few rounds of litigation and has dealt us aces.

By basing RKBA on the natural right to self-defense he has set up a winning round for us when someone wants to carry their firearms outside the home. It is impossible to defend the notion that your right to self-defense ends at your front gate.

The opinion soundly rejects the notion that the most liberal of levels of scrutiny is appropriate. He has done what he could do to move us toward strict scrutiny without actually visiting an issue that was not on the table.

He left us with a tension between two declarations: One, that 2A applies to all bearable arms, and another that disallows M16s and the like.

I'm more and more of the opinion that the AWB would be unconstitutional under just what we have won so far.

I am absolutely delighted that Fenty had taken the stand that registration of semi-auto handguns will not be allowed. He will get soundly clopped alongside the head with a 2x4 for that, and that issue will be crystal clear for ever after.

Morton Grove and Willmette have folded. I greatly hope that Daley fights. He's easy pickin's right now, and we need to get incorporation against the states.

A poster on another board called this the "Battle of Midway". I think that is very apt. We just crippled the enemy's ability to do effective battle. The end is no longer in doubt, but there is a tremendous amount of hard work yet to be done.